MovieChat Forums > Roman Holiday (1953) Discussion > Really, stealing cameras from little gir...

Really, stealing cameras from little girls?


That was creepy as all heck

reply

[deleted]

He was only going to borrow it (but steal the film, I guess). This film was a comedy - which are meant to take a lighthearted look at human foibles and character flaws.

reply

He was only going to borrow it
Yes, but these days approaching the girl the way he did is enough to get you arrested. Maybe rightly so. It may have looked innocent in the fifties, it wouldn't be tolerated in this century.

--
Rome. By all means, Rome.

reply

"It may have looked innocent in the fifties"

Exactly. And that's the end of it.

reply

i agree. the poster below you thinks it's ok just because it was in the 50s but inappropriate is still so no matter the decade


reply

Yea sure the scene was awkward - it was intended to be. It was no more appropriate for an adult man to be approaching a young girl in 1953 than it is today, in 2015. Joe certainly got stared down by the girl's teacher.

But nothing about this scene is "creepy." It works as a mildly humorous interlude because we already know Joe's intention; he wants the camera to snap a photo for his news story. So we know he's not trying to molest the girl and he is not a pedophile.

reply

yes, agree with your post.



🎄Season's Greetings!🎁🎅🎄

reply

That girl should've given her camera!

reply

That scene has some really unfortunate connotations when seen through modern eyes...


Supermodels...spoiled stupid little stick figures mit poofy lips who sink only about zemselves.

reply

Ay yi yi!

It was an excellent scene - quite funny because it's so naturally embarrassing to him - and very honest abot his desire for the story because of his desire for the money to get back to New York.

We are NOT meant to think of Peck and Eddie Albert as saints. They gamble, they grumble, they want OUT! Peck turns Hepburn out of the bed to use it for himself. Peck oversleeps. Peck lies to his boss the next morning about having done the story. Peck lets Hepburn believe she slept in the bed. Eddie Albert is something of a wolf. Both conspire to deceive poor Audrey throughout the day - to earn a lot of money from their bet.

They're living, breathing adult men - with flaws - not saints!

When characters do things that are quite wrong - sure, we naturally condemn them - borrowing a camera to a girl for a few minutes for something that greatly matters to him is not deeply wrong.

reply

This is a GREAT post. Thank you for an intelligent look at this wonderful film.

reply

Yes, great post, and in fact without the portrayal of them as flawed, the ending, where they both do the right thing, would not be anywhere as great.

Prepare your minds for a new scale of physical, scientific values, gentlemen.

reply

So. Have we gotten to the requisite pedophilic references yet? Let's see:

Do we have the word "creepy"?
CHECK!

Do we have the term "child molester"?
CHECK!

Okay. It fits the requirements of an IMDB thread. It brings up Politically Correct child molesting in an otherwise wonderful movie by people that just HAVE to find pedophilia in every movie ever created.

It can stay on the boards.

..Joe

PS: Moron!

reply

At the time this scene would just be considered humorous and nothing else. It's all the do-gooders and self righteous morons who have to come in and start putting modern spins on older situations.

They'll probably think it's creepy that the barber was combing the princesses hair during the dance as well.



reply

joegerardi-1, you comment is 100% right on, and effectively written! It seems that every single time I read comments on the IMDB, somebody is bringing up some scene that smacks them of pedophilia (just yesterday I read the same thing on the forum about the movie, "Treasure Island", why Long John Silver just had to be a pedophile to go off treasure hunting with Jim!). There are people who really do have pedophilia on their brain and THAT is what is worrying (what are they projecting?).

One historical fact that so many of these people are completely unaware of was that until late in the 20th century, so-called "children" were actually functioning in the adult world even as early as the ages of 9 or 10, meaning that they were WORKING, on farms and in factories, serving as drummer boys or flag-bearers during wars, and even had businesses of their own. The longer children are kept from adult responsibilities (some now view childhood to last all the way until a person has earned a master's degree, or whenever it is that they finally stop being supported by their parents and getting their education paid for), the more society will feel that they need to be kept in a bubble and protected from every kind of "predator", "predator" merely being any kind of an adult who dares speak to them.

reply

I agree with you that people shouldn't assume a scene from an older movie is more than what it actually is. But I think you are missing the point: That kind of mindset is the byproduct of the times we live in now. In the news media we hear of molestation going on almost weekly. And then when someone views the camera scene in this movie they think it's creepy. They shouldn't because it wasn't meant to be, but, unfortunately, the times we live in put a different spin on it.

When I viewed the scene I thought it was poorly executed. He was simply trying to take the camera off her neck and he was doing it slowly. I didn't think it was creepy (I wasn't thinking the guy was a pedophile), I just thought that if he was trying to steal the camera he should have tried to trick her. For example: If I was the director I would have set the scene up where the girl didn't have the camera around her neck but just in her hand. Joe could have secretly untied her shoe, then told her it was untied so she would put the camera down to tie it. As he was trying to take the camera the teacher/chaperone could have walked up and caught him in the act and tell him to get lost. I think that would have shown he lacks scruples with the same outcome, he doesn't get the camera.

"Kiss my Converse!" -Sho'nuff: The Shogun of Harlem.

reply

So much drama. Just enjoy the movie and stop obsessing over what other people think of it. Any work of art--movie, book, painting, whatever--is subject to interpretation and reinterpretation over the years. If you enjoy it, continue to do so and stop fussing over the conversations other people have.

reply

Yes pedophilia and Misogyny is the other thing people HAVE to find in every movie every created as well. Just started reading these forums and ay yi yi yi...I'm sure this movie is misogynistic as well....

reply

I'll admit, even though that scene made me laugh, the way it all happened was really awkward. I mean, the small girl clearly felt uncomfortable there.

But in the end, he was really just trying to "borrow" her camera. There's nothing creepy about that.



They really are rude to Americans! - Al Bundy on the French

reply

Haha, that was one awkward scene. And it didn't make me laugh as much as this thread does.

__________
Last movie watched: Pickup on South Street (7/10)

reply

[deleted]